Mrs BRAHAM - 1997-02-18
Did the Chief Minister hear the Leader of the Opposition state on the 8DDD news on 17 January this year that she was opposed to dealing with the confusion and chaos created by the Wik case by way of legislation? Did he also hear her subsequently urge the Northern Territory government to negotiate and make individual settlements with claimants? Does the Chief Minister interpret this approach as amounting, in effect, to the Leader of the Opposition and the ALP supporting the native title claim over Darwin?
Mrs Padgham-Purich: Why should it negotiate?
Page 1896
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I thank the member for her question.
Mr Ah Kit: You only answer your own questions, not ours.
Mr STONE: They have not improved at all. I thought ...
Mr Bailey: So far your answers have been what? Tabling cartoons!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: You are a real life cartoon.
I will attempt to answer the question. From the way that the Leader of the Opposition moved, it is clear that it must have been quite a love-in that she had with her colleagues. She went from a position of saying that she was with the government in opposition to the claim to a position of saying that she is opposed to its being dealt with by way of legislation and that the government should negotiate. As the member for Nelson interjected, why should it? The simple facts are ...
Mr Stirling: Because you are the government, that is why.
Mr STONE: Not only is this claim an ambit claim, but it also borders on the ridiculous. The member for Nhulunbuy says that we should negotiate because we are the government. Does that mean that the government should negotiate with every crackpot who rolls up and makes a demand on it? That must have been quite a meeting ...
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr STONE: I will pick up the interjection from the member from Nhulunbuy. There is no legal right to claim freehold land, you dill! Why don't you find out just what people can and cannot do under the Native Title Act?
I will return to the story. When asked on Drive Time on 2 December whether caucus had considered its position, the Leader of the Opposition stated: `Yes, a pretty united caucus' - I am not sure what `pretty united' means - `and one which - well, we were all taken by surprise by this claim and obviously need to see some more detail on it, but our initial reaction was one that we were opposed to this blanket claim'. Next day, Tuesday 3 December, the member for Arnhem was reported in the NT News under the headline, `Rift in ALP Over Title'. The article read: `A rift appeared in the Labor opposition yesterday over the Larrakia native title claim. Arnhem MLA and former Northern Land Council director John Ah Kit said his views on the land claim differed slightly' - whatever that means - `from those of his leader, Maggie Hickey, and other caucus colleagues'.
Mr Ah Kit: You do not fit that description.
Page 1897
Mr STONE: What was that interjection? You never used that description? Therefore, the journalist is a liar?
Mr Ah Kit: No, I said you did not fit that description.
Mr STONE: The article continued: `Mrs Hickey had said that the blanket claim by the city's Larrakia people was an extensive ambit claim with little chance or no chance of success'. If, in fact, the Leader of the Opposition is consistent in the views that she is expressing, that this is an ambit claim and it has little chance of success, why would she send government down the path of negotiation, with all the resource implications of that? Tens of people are now working on these native title claims. Why would she send us off on a wild-goose chase to negotiate over something that these people have no right to claim in the first place? It is duplicitous. The Leader of the Opposition is trying to play to 2 audiences. She is trying to keep sweet with people in the towns and cities, who quite rightly feel aggrieved by these claims over beaches and foreshores and places like East Point Reserve, but she is talking out of both sides of her mouth because she says to the NLC ...
Members interjecting.
Mr Speaker: Order!
Mr STONE: She says to her mates in the land councils: `You understand that I have to go through this routine, but you know that really I support you'. That is the position of the opposition. This is the position the Leader of the Opposition. She supports the native title claim over Darwin and the native title claim over Alice Springs. She does that by saying that the government should negotiate. Ipso facto, you have a right to negotiate and make your claim. It is a backdoor means of giving support to the claimants. On this one occasion, why won't the Labor Party stand shoulder-to-shoulder with other Territorians and with government and say that these claims are wrong and should be withdrawn forever?
Page 1898
Mrs Padgham-Purich: Why should it negotiate?
Page 1896
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I thank the member for her question.
Mr Ah Kit: You only answer your own questions, not ours.
Mr STONE: They have not improved at all. I thought ...
Mr Bailey: So far your answers have been what? Tabling cartoons!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr STONE: You are a real life cartoon.
I will attempt to answer the question. From the way that the Leader of the Opposition moved, it is clear that it must have been quite a love-in that she had with her colleagues. She went from a position of saying that she was with the government in opposition to the claim to a position of saying that she is opposed to its being dealt with by way of legislation and that the government should negotiate. As the member for Nelson interjected, why should it? The simple facts are ...
Mr Stirling: Because you are the government, that is why.
Mr STONE: Not only is this claim an ambit claim, but it also borders on the ridiculous. The member for Nhulunbuy says that we should negotiate because we are the government. Does that mean that the government should negotiate with every crackpot who rolls up and makes a demand on it? That must have been quite a meeting ...
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr STONE: I will pick up the interjection from the member from Nhulunbuy. There is no legal right to claim freehold land, you dill! Why don't you find out just what people can and cannot do under the Native Title Act?
I will return to the story. When asked on Drive Time on 2 December whether caucus had considered its position, the Leader of the Opposition stated: `Yes, a pretty united caucus' - I am not sure what `pretty united' means - `and one which - well, we were all taken by surprise by this claim and obviously need to see some more detail on it, but our initial reaction was one that we were opposed to this blanket claim'. Next day, Tuesday 3 December, the member for Arnhem was reported in the NT News under the headline, `Rift in ALP Over Title'. The article read: `A rift appeared in the Labor opposition yesterday over the Larrakia native title claim. Arnhem MLA and former Northern Land Council director John Ah Kit said his views on the land claim differed slightly' - whatever that means - `from those of his leader, Maggie Hickey, and other caucus colleagues'.
Mr Ah Kit: You do not fit that description.
Page 1897
Mr STONE: What was that interjection? You never used that description? Therefore, the journalist is a liar?
Mr Ah Kit: No, I said you did not fit that description.
Mr STONE: The article continued: `Mrs Hickey had said that the blanket claim by the city's Larrakia people was an extensive ambit claim with little chance or no chance of success'. If, in fact, the Leader of the Opposition is consistent in the views that she is expressing, that this is an ambit claim and it has little chance of success, why would she send government down the path of negotiation, with all the resource implications of that? Tens of people are now working on these native title claims. Why would she send us off on a wild-goose chase to negotiate over something that these people have no right to claim in the first place? It is duplicitous. The Leader of the Opposition is trying to play to 2 audiences. She is trying to keep sweet with people in the towns and cities, who quite rightly feel aggrieved by these claims over beaches and foreshores and places like East Point Reserve, but she is talking out of both sides of her mouth because she says to the NLC ...
Members interjecting.
Mr Speaker: Order!
Mr STONE: She says to her mates in the land councils: `You understand that I have to go through this routine, but you know that really I support you'. That is the position of the opposition. This is the position the Leader of the Opposition. She supports the native title claim over Darwin and the native title claim over Alice Springs. She does that by saying that the government should negotiate. Ipso facto, you have a right to negotiate and make your claim. It is a backdoor means of giving support to the claimants. On this one occasion, why won't the Labor Party stand shoulder-to-shoulder with other Territorians and with government and say that these claims are wrong and should be withdrawn forever?
Page 1898
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016